# COLUMN: Trump says Zelensky is holding up — and Moscow is genuinely worried > On June 25, 2026, in the hushed corridor of the Oval Office, Donald Trump said something few observers saw coming. Asked about the state of the conflict in Ukraine, he declared that Volodymyr Zelensky was doing "pretty well" and that he was "holding his own" against Russia. Two adverbs. Not a diplomatic declaration of war. But in the context of four years of war and a Trump-Zel - Author: Maxime Marquette - Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co) - Section: Column - Published: 2026-06-29 - Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/chronique-trump-dit-que-zelensky-tient-bon-et-moscou-s-en-inquiete-vraiment ## Introduction: The moment Trump changed his tone ### A sentence dropped in the Oval Office On **June 25, 2026**, in the hushed corridor of the **Oval Office**, **Donald Trump** said something few observers saw coming. Asked about the state of the conflict in **Ukraine**, he declared that **Volodymyr Zelensky** was doing **"pretty well"** and that he was **"holding his own"** against **Russia**. Two adverbs. Not a diplomatic declaration of war. But in the context of **four years of war** and a Trump-Zelensky relationship built on repeated public friction, those words carry weight. This is not a 180-degree reversal. **Trump** remains **Trump**: unpredictable, capable of walking anything back tomorrow, as susceptible to flattery from adversaries as from allies. But the words were spoken. And Moscow heard them. *When Trump compliments a leader, it's rarely free. He measures, tests, calibrates. Zelensky understood that. The question is whether Washington drew the same conclusions as Kyiv.* ## The Évian-les-Bains dinner that changed everything ### What the Financial Times reported A few days before the public statement, the **Financial Times** revealed that at the **G7 summit** in **Évian-les-Bains**, **Trump** had been **"hugely impressed and enthusiastic"** at a private dinner with **Zelensky**. The two men discussed Ukrainian military results, drones, and deep strikes on Russian territory. According to FT sources, Trump listened — genuinely listened — for more than an hour. That is not trivial. **Trump** rarely listens to people he doesn't respect. The meeting in **Évian** marked a turning point in the American perception of **Zelensky** as a valid strategic interlocutor — no longer a supplicant, but a **commander-in-chief who delivers**. ### Zelensky's logic: prove before you ask Since the start of **2026**, **Zelensky** adopted a precise doctrine: show results before making demands. The **13 strikes on Russian defense industries** recorded in June alone, the **FP-5 Flamingo** drones reaching factories in **Volgograd**, the **660 drones** launched in a single night — all of it speaks for itself. No pleading required. Numbers convince better than speeches. And **Trump**, a businessman above all else, understands results. There is an arithmetic of war he reads better than most conventional politicians: who strikes, who advances, who holds. In **June 2026**, the answer was unambiguous. *Zelensky's genius in this episode was transforming the battlefield into a diplomatic argument. Not a moralizing speech about democracy — burned targets, numbers, facts. That's what speaks to Trump.* ## Lavrov infuriated, Moscow destabilized ### The Russian reaction: official contempt masking real nervousness In **Moscow**, Foreign Minister **Sergei Lavrov** publicly dismissed **Trump**'s statements, calling them **"empty rhetoric."** But behind the official denials, according to **Semafor**, the pro-Ukraine tone from **Washington** since the Alaska meeting with **Witkoff** in May **2026** is **"unnerving Moscow."** Russian diplomats have begun sounding out their European counterparts to assess the true state of American-Ukrainian relations. What troubles the **Kremlin** is not so much American support in itself — they expected that — but the **new consistency** in Washington's message. **Trump** had long been Russia's wild card: unpredictable, potentially detachable from NATO. If that wild card becomes a stable backer of Ukraine, **Putin**'s roadmap toward peace on his own terms collapses. ### The Alaska precedent: when Witkoff surprised Moscow In May **2026**, during indirect talks in **Alaska**, American envoy **Steve Witkoff** adopted a tone considerably firmer than Moscow had anticipated. The Russians were expecting an accommodating intermediary; they found someone who set conditions. That precedent shifted the **Kremlin**'s assessment of where **Trump** was heading. Since then, the signals have been stacking up: continued support for weapons deliveries, no questioning of sanctions, and now these publicly flattering statements about **Zelensky**. For Moscow, each new signal in the same direction reinforces an uncomfortable conclusion: **Trump will not hand them Ukraine**. *Moscow had bet on Trump's unpredictability as leverage. That bet is backfiring. A Trump consistent in his support for Ukraine is precisely the scenario the Kremlin didn't know how to handle.* ## The mechanics of Trump-Zelensky trust ### Why Trump now respects Zelensky The relationship between **Trump** and **Zelensky** has gone through phases. In **2019**, there was the phone call that nearly cost Trump his presidency during the first impeachment. In **2022–2023**, Trump openly criticized the billions sent to **Kyiv**. In **2025**, tensions over the terms of any negotiation. Then came **2026** — and something changed. What changed was proof. **Zelensky** delivered quantifiable military results: **1,400,000 Russian soldiers** put out of action since the start of the war according to Ukrainian data, deep strikes on Russian defense factories, a drone industry doubling its output every quarter. **Trump** can present that as evidence that American aid is working. It's politically usable. ### The G7 as a recalibration stage The **G7 summit** in **Évian-les-Bains** served as a theater of recalibration. **Zelensky** was not there to beg — he was there to present results. The other G7 leaders watched the dynamic. What **Trump** said in public was not a slip: it was a deliberate validation of a relationship being rebuilt on new, more pragmatic, less sentimental foundations. For European allies, this recalibration is good news — but also a warning. Ukraine succeeded where several European capitals had failed: convincing **Trump** on his own terms, not theirs. *The G7 at Évian may go down in the history books as the moment Trump officially stopped treating Zelensky as a problem to solve and started seeing him as a strategic asset. That's not nothing.* ## The doctrine of proof through facts ### Zelensky speaks Trump's language To convince **Trump**, you don't talk about democracy, international law, or Western values. You talk about results, yields, return on investment. **Zelensky** understood that — perhaps better than anyone else in **2026**. Every American military delivery is presented in detailed reports showing its concrete impact on the ground. The **FP-5 Flamingo drones**, the strikes on Russian refineries in the **40-day operation** approved at the end of June, the **Storm Shadow** missiles destroying semiconductor factories in **Voronezh** — all of it constitutes a performance file that **Trump** can grasp immediately. That's the language he speaks. ### The economic argument of war There is also an economic dimension that **Trump** factors in: if **Ukraine** holds, if it strikes, if it weakens the Russian war machine, it absorbs a threat to the Western world without the **United States** having to send its own soldiers. From an American strategic standpoint, it's a form of genius: outsource the defense of the Western order to a partner that pays the price in blood itself. That reasoning likely weighed heavily during the private dinner in **Évian**. **Zelensky** framed it in **Trump**'s own terms: Ukraine is the cheapest insurance policy **America** has ever bought. Not in those exact words — but the idea was there. *There's something brutally lucid in this approach. Zelensky didn't ask Trump to like him. He showed him a dashboard. And Trump liked the numbers. That may be what real war diplomacy looks like in the 21st century.* ## What Europe must take away from this ### The European paradox **Europe** spent years explaining to **Trump** why he should support **Ukraine** for moral and geopolitical reasons. It didn't convince him. **Zelensky** used drones and precision strikes as arguments. He convinced him. That contrast deserves study in every European chancellery. Europe's problem with **Trump** is not a values problem — it's a language problem. Europeans keep talking in terms of alliances, treaties, obligations. **Trump** talks in terms of transactions, results, comparative advantage. Until that translation gap is bridged, **Washington** will be more easily moved by a commander-in-chief who burns factories than by endless summits on defense budgets. ### The lesson of the Évian dinner for European capitals What European diplomats need to understand is that partnership with **Trump** is built in facts, not declarations. **Zelensky** presented satellite images of successful strikes, documented Russian casualty figures, lists of neutralized targets. That's not a speech — it's an execution report. **Europe** should learn to present its contribution to Atlantic security the same way: not in terms of political commitment, but in terms of deployed capabilities, conducted strikes, held lines. That's the only register this American administration genuinely listens to. *I'm not saying that's how diplomacy should work. I'm saying that's how it works right now. And Europe that doesn't adapt will be left out of the decisions that matter.* ## Ukraine in Trump's mind: the evolution of a perception ### From 2019 to 2026: the distance traveled Seven years ago, **Trump** saw **Ukraine** as territory for domestic political maneuvering — the place you call to ask a foreign president for favors. Today, he sees a military partner producing results he can leverage. This is not a moral transformation. It's a transformation of interest. That evolution was fed by concrete facts: Ukrainian resistance since **February 24, 2022**, drone performance, strikes on Russian territory, and **Zelensky**'s capacity to remain standing despite the bombs, despite the pressure, despite the presumed betrayals of certain allies. Trump respects resistance. He respects passive victims less. ### The Zelensky variable in the American calculation There is also a personal dimension: **Trump** likes winners. He liked **Zelensky** when he thought **Ukraine** would lose quickly — it let him prepare a clean exit. Now that **Ukraine** holds, that the strikes land, that pressure on **Russia** is real, **Zelensky** belongs to the category of people who **"don't lose."** And Trump always associates with people who don't lose. That logic is fragile — it depends on the continuity of Ukrainian military results. But for now, the momentum is favorable. And in Trumpian politics, the moment is everything. *What I find fascinating about this episode is that Zelensky didn't try to change Trump. He used Trump as he is — a man who follows winners. That's a form of tactical genius many leaders haven't dared to exercise.* ## The signal sent to Beijing and Tehran ### More than a statement about Ukraine **Trump**'s statement about **Zelensky** is not just a statement about **Ukraine**. It is read in **Beijing**, in **Tehran**, in **Pyongyang**. It says: **Washington** is watching who holds, who strikes, who delivers results. That's not a guarantee of eternal support — but it's a signal that alignment with the **West**'s adversaries carries real costs. **China**, which supports **Russia** economically while dodging sanctions, is watching this episode closely. If **Trump** consolidates his support for **Ukraine**, the cost-benefit calculation of Chinese backing for **Moscow** gets more complicated. **Beijing** does not want to be on the wrong side of an American administration that has decided who it backs. ### Iran and North Korea in the equation **Iran** continues delivering **Shahed** drones to **Russia**. **North Korea** sends soldiers to die in **Russia**, cannon fodder for the **Kremlin**. Both actors are watching what **Trump** does or doesn't do. If **Washington** sends a clear signal of support for **Ukraine**, that raises the cost of association with **Russia** for sanctioned regimes. This is not a coherent foreign policy — **Trump** generally doesn't produce one. But the effects of a positive statement about **Zelensky** ripple far beyond the immediate context in which it was made. *We always underestimate the ripple effects of a single Trump sentence. His allies hear it as confirmation. His adversaries hear it as a warning. All of this without a policy paper, without a formal strategy — just two words in a corridor.* ## What Zelensky obtained without asking for it ### Recognition as a diplomatic resource In modern wars, **international recognition** is a resource as real as ammunition. When the president of the **United States** publicly says your commander-in-chief is **"holding his own,"** it affects how your position is perceived in every capital that looks to Washington as a reference point. Countries still hesitating to deliver advanced weapons to **Ukraine** — some **NATO** members on the southern flank, some Asian partners — recalibrate their analysis when they hear **Trump** speak positively about **Zelensky**. It's not automatic, but it's real. ### Peace negotiation from a position of strength For any future peace negotiation, **Zelensky** now arrives with significantly stronger American political capital. When serious talks begin — if they begin — the fact that **Trump** publicly acknowledged Ukrainian performance gives **Kyiv** a position of strength it didn't have at the start of the year. **Russia** only negotiates with those it perceives as weakened. The more **Zelensky** appears solid in **Trump**'s eyes, the greater the pressure on **Putin** to negotiate seriously. That's no guarantee of peace — but it's one more lever in a file where every lever counts. *There's deep irony here: Zelensky got from Trump what three years of war hadn't managed to solidify — a clear public recognition. And he got it by doing exactly what Trump would do himself: deliver results and present the bill.* ## The fragility of this support ### Trump tomorrow can contradict Trump today It would be naive to conclude that **Trump**'s support for **Zelensky** is now locked in and stable. **Trump** has a long history of sharp reversals, contradictory statements within 48 hours, relationships that flip with the day's news. The **June 25, 2026** statement is a positive signal — not a guarantee. If Ukrainian military results slow, if a Russian offensive succeeds, if **Putin** presents **Trump** with an enticing economic offer, the calculation can change. **Zelensky** knows this. That's exactly why the **40-day operation** against Russian installations was launched precisely now — to capitalize on the window of American support. ### American dependence as a structural risk More fundamentally, **Ukraine**'s dependence on the moods of a single American president is a structural risk that **Zelensky** is working to reduce. Bilateral partnerships with European countries, direct deliveries of **Patriot** interceptor drones, weapons production agreements — all of this aims to diversify support beyond American backing alone. But in the immediate term, it is **Washington** that matters most. And for now, **Washington** is sending positive signals. Zelensky capitalizes on them. That's the only reasonable decision. *I don't sleep better because Trump said two kind words about Zelensky. The war continues. Bombs fall. But in the parallel diplomatic game, every signal counts. And this one, for now, points in the right direction.* ## Zelensky, the man who refuses to lose ### The profile of an atypical commander-in-chief Since **February 24, 2022**, when everyone told him to flee, **Zelensky** has built a rare political presence in contemporary history: a leader who stayed, who fought, who made mistakes and kept going regardless. That's not propaganda — it's a fact documented by years of reporting. That presence has weight. When **Trump** says **Zelensky** is **"holding his own,"** he is implicitly acknowledging something few modern politicians would manage: leading a country under bombs, maintaining functioning institutions, negotiating with inconsistent allies, all while commanding an army advancing against every initial expectation. ### Resistance as geopolitical capital Ukrainian resistance is not merely moral — it has become **concrete geopolitical capital**. It has demonstrated that the Russian army is not invincible. It has weakened **Moscow**'s defense industrial machine beyond what analysts predicted in **2022**. It has compelled **Europe** to revise its defense budgets in ways it hadn't for thirty years. And now, it is even convincing **Trump**. That last result may be the most improbable of the four. *There are men who change situations. And there are men who change perceptions of situations. Zelensky does both. That's extremely rare. And it deserves to be named, even in a sober register.* ## The 40-day operation in this context ### Strike while the support holds On **June 25, 2026**, the same day **Trump** praised **Zelensky**, Zelensky approved a **40-day operation** targeting Russian refineries, fuel depots, and logistics installations. The timing is not coincidental. When American support strengthens, that's the moment to act — before the wind shifts. The preliminary results of the operation — the **Ufa** refineries hit, the **Norsi** refinery in **Nizhny Novgorod** struck, the **Krasnodar** oil depot damaged — will be presented to **Washington** as further proof that **Ukraine** strikes hard and strikes accurately. The cycle feeds itself. ### Economic pressure on Russia as a complementary strategy Depriving **Russia** of fuel means depriving its tanks, supply trucks, and fighter jets of the one resource without which no army functions. It also strikes the Russian economy where it is most vulnerable: the hydrocarbon exports that finance the war. For **Trump**, this economic dimension is particularly compelling. Weakening Russia's export capacity also shifts market balances in oil — a variable the American administration monitors closely. *The 40-day operation is strategic communication as much as a military campaign. It says to Trump: we strike hard, we strike accurately, and here are the real-time results. That's the best diplomatic argument a general can produce.* ## What this column is not ### Not premature triumphalism I am not writing that the war is won. I am not writing that **Trump** has converted into an eternal ally of **Ukraine**. I am not writing that **Putin** will fold tomorrow. The situation remains grave, Ukrainian losses are real, and the **241 clashes** recorded on the front on **June 27, 2026** are a reminder that the violence doesn't de-escalate on the strength of a dinner in **Évian**. What I am writing is that something shifted. A signal was sent. And in a war where diplomatic signals matter as much as shells, that signal deserves to be named with precision — not crushed under reflexive skepticism or inflated by blind enthusiasm. ### War as a system: reading signals without distorting them This war is a complex system with dozens of variables — military, diplomatic, economic, internal to each country involved. **Trump**'s statement is one of those variables. It doesn't determine everything. But it influences other variables: Ukrainian morale, Russia's reading of the situation, the position of hesitant allies. Reading complex systems without oversimplifying them is what serious analysis demands. And serious analysis is saying right now: the Trump-Zelensky dynamic just shifted in a positive direction. That's not everything. That's not nothing. It's real. *I'd rather be wrong in naming a real change than stay silent out of fear of looking naive. Analysis is not a pessimism contest. It's an exercise in precision — and right now, precision says: something happened at Évian.* ## The information war Kyiv is winning ### Narrative and ground reality: two simultaneous fronts Two wars are unfolding simultaneously: the physical war on Ukrainian soil, and the narrative war in world capitals. **Zelensky** understood long ago that he had to win both. **Trump**'s statement is a victory in the second war — perhaps as significant as some victories in the first. The **Kremlin** has invested heavily in the information war since **2014**, trying to convince Western public opinion that **Ukraine** was corrupt, ungovernable, a waste of resources. Those years of disinformation now run up against a simple counter-narrative: **Zelensky holds, results are documented, Trump acknowledges it.** ### The story being built despite the bombs While Iranian **Shahed** drones fall on Ukrainian cities, while Russian ballistic missiles hunt power plants, **Ukraine** is building a narrative of resistance and competence that transcends sympathy to reach respect. Those are not the same thing. Sympathy fades. Respect generates alliances. What **Trump** expressed at **Évian** looks more like respect than sympathy. And in Trumpian politics, respect translates into concrete acts: continued support, export licenses, access to military technologies. That's why two words spoken in a White House corridor carry more weight than ten **UN** resolutions. *The information war isn't won with press releases. It's won with burning factories, enemy soldiers who don't come back, and a commander-in-chief who refuses to flee. Zelensky understood that well before anyone taught him.* ## Conclusion: One word from Trump, a ripple across the world ### The power of presidential words An American president's words travel differently than those of any other leader. They trigger policy revisions in dozens of chancelleries. They shift market expectations, allied calculations, adversarial strategies. When **Trump** says **Zelensky** is **"holding his own,"** he is not merely commenting on a situation — he is modifying its parameters. For **Kyiv**, this signal arrives at the right moment. For **Moscow**, it arrives at the wrong one. For **Europe**, it should serve as a lesson in how to build a partnership with an American administration that only responds to the language of results. And for **Ukraine**, it confirms a truth **Zelensky** has always known: the best diplomacy is conducted on the ground, with concrete results that speak for themselves. ### What comes next The **40-day operation** continues. Drones fly. Factories burn. **Russian soldiers** die by the thousands — **1,250** on **June 27** alone. Zelensky holds. Trump acknowledges it. And **Putin**, for the first time in a long while, can't read the ally he had counted on most. That's enough for today. Tomorrow will be another day. *We wanted an unconditional ally in Trump. We got something more useful: an ally who follows results. As long as Ukraine strikes hard, Washington watches. That's enough to keep fighting.* **By Maxime Marquette, columnist** ## Columnist's transparency note ### Editorial stance I am not a journalist but a **columnist and analyst**. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies. I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. **I claim analytical clarity**, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events. ### Method and sources This text keeps the basic distinction between **verified facts and interpretive analysis**. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under **Sources**, never here. **Primary source families** used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies. **Secondary source families**: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations. When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under **Sources**. ### Nature of the analysis The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a **critical, contextual synthesis** based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted. My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors. This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text. ## Sources ### Primary sources - [The Guardian — Zelensky "doing pretty well against Russia," declares Trump — June 25, 2026](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jun/25/ukraine-war-briefing-zelenskyy-doing-pretty-well-against-russia-declares-trump) - [Euromaidan Press — Trump told Zelensky he was impressed by Ukraine's battlefield results, FT reports — June 24, 2026](https://euromaidanpress.com/2026/06/24/trump-told-zelenskyy-he-was-impressed-by-ukraines-battlefield-results-ft-reports/) ### Secondary sources - [Semafor — US pro-Ukraine tone unnerves Moscow — June 23, 2026](https://www.semafor.com/article/06/23/2026/us-pro-ukraine-tone-unnerves-moscow) - [United24 Media — Ukraine's FP-5 Flamingo missiles strike factory behind Russia's Iskander and Yars launchers — June 27, 2026](https://united24media.com/war-in-ukraine/ukraines-fp-5-flamingo-missiles-strike-factory-behind-russias-iskander-and-yars-launchers-20219) - [Ukrainska Pravda — Frontline update, 241 clashes June 27 — June 28, 2026](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/06/28/8041443/) - [Euronews — Ukraine launches 40-day operation to pressure Russia to end the war — June 26, 2026](https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2026/06/26/ukraine-launches-40-day-operation-to-pressure-russia-to-end-the-war) --- Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/chronique-trump-dit-que-zelensky-tient-bon-et-moscou-s-en-inquiete-vraiment